Frida

Frida isn’t a bad film, but it often floats around the edges of its subject. We learn more about Diego Rivera—the man who painted walls—and the famous figures orbiting her, like Trotsky and Rockefeller, than we do about Frida Kahlo herself. There’s not enough insight into what drives her, what fuels her art, or who she truly is beneath the striking imagery. The most insightful moment comes in a brief exchange—less than 20 seconds—as she talks to Trotsky atop Mayan ruins. But even that is quickly reframed through his interpretation of her story before he shifts the focus to his family, stripping her of agency once again. The direction is lively and visually creative, and Salma Hayek is strong in the lead, but the film never quite digs deep. It feels more like a guided tour of those around her than a portrait of the woman herself.

Salma Hayek should have received the Oscar. Enough said.

I could understand why people could like this movie, but it just wasn't for me. Lost interest about halfway through, as it just did not have much to keep me intrigued. If you are a fan of romance and artistry, you'll love this. Just not for me. I also did not seem to learn much about Frida. I will praise the visuals and acting though, was really well done.

The movie is mostly very mundane and a tedious watch. I can only recommend watching it if you are interested in the life and history of Frida as well as the history of communism. However, even in the depiction of these themes the experience can seem a bit muddled and unclear in intention.

Cómo espectador a veces sentimos como si la película pasara de un colorido acontecimiento a otro sin tregua, pero a Frida Kahlo le debe haber parecido que su vida también lo hacía

If not for Hayek's performance and Taymor's interesting forays into Kahlo's mind, this would be a pretty forgettable biopic.

In an age of fake super-heroes, this a movie of a real human hero. This is not a story with a Hollywood ending but a story about real life. I won't say more as I think it as you should see the movie unfold a a life unfolds.

While a showcase to find Salma Hayek at her dignified best and more of Alfred Molina's humbleness to form a melodramatic chemistry, the film itself seems to go by the numbers with effective grips but dazzles more as unique cinematic appreciation towards art in general with such respectful exhibition to representationally express the subject's influence. (B+)

An incredible sight on the life of astonishing artist. I love her paintings, how they are deep, meaningful and relatable. I definitely recommend this worderful combination of art and representation of her sadly beautiful life.

This movie evokes David Lean's "Lawrence Of Arabia" in a sense, that both movies were not intended to be straight biographies of their respective historical figures. In fact, this movie even made me think of the "I Love Lucy" sitcom, with Diego Rivera as the buffoon to Frida Kahlo the straight woman. The movie starts with Frida Kahlo at age 18, just before she had the accident while riding a bus, which would cause her crippling injuries she would carry for the remainder of her life. She is given a canvas and paints by her family to occupy her while she initially recovers, and she adopts a surrealistic style, and later meets and marries already famous muralist Diego Rivera. They become left-wing radicals while living in high society, move to the United States where Rivera would try to paint his mural depicting Lenin in the Rockefeller Center, then move back when the project is cancelled and the mural destroyed. Both spouses have many extramarital affairs, though Diego gets upset when his wife has one with Leon Trotsky. (I saw the movie in the theater, and the audience all groaned in mockery when Diego complained to Frida about it.) Like I said, the movie is drama rather than biography; we see Frida, despite her sufferings, as strong and laughing at her many troubles. We don't see what moves her politically or artistically, but the movie is for entertainment and not education.